November 18, 2025 • 23 mins
Prosecutors say Indiana’s Stand Your Ground Law does not apply to homeowner Curt Anderson, who fired a single shot from the top of his stairs, through his front door, killing a 32-year-old house cleaner who’s GPS sent her to the wrong home. Anderson said he feared for his life when he was awakened to the sound of someone trying to enter his home, grabbed his gun and fired. He maintains it was his right to do so under the stand your ground law, but prosecutors maintain that fear alone is not enough to justify invoking the law. This is just the latest tragedy to unfold where a gun owner kills someone who actually meant them no harm, and is reigniting the debate on whether these laws embolden people to shoot first, and ask questions later.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Hey, they're folks. Welcome to Amy and TJ Presents. And
today a man in Indiana shot and killed a woman
who had shown up to his house just to clean
the house. He has yes been charged, but he has
a defense, folks, stand your ground. And with that, welcome
(00:26):
to this episode of Amy and TJ Presents. DJ Holmes
here alongside Amy roboch Robes. This is going to be
another case that we have these stand your ground laws
getting national attention.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Yes.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
And the concern is that sometimes these laws a lot
of folks believe make homeowners especially feel like they have
the right to defend their property, their family with deadly force,
no matter what, and that just isn't the case.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
And some try to interpret the law just as what
you said, I can defend my home no matter what,
with deadly force. And this is a case Robes that
I think we're going to have some tricky, tricky legal questions.
This story comes to us out of Indiana, outside of Indianapolis,
a town is called, of all things, White's Town. Do
(01:18):
I have that right?
Speaker 2 (01:18):
Yeah, you do. It's called Whitewn.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Whitestown, a suburb of Indianapolis. But this is on November fifth,
that a woman showed up to a home with her
husband cleaning crew. They're trying to open the door to
get into this home. Just before seven am. Shot rings out.
Homeowner inside awakened, startled, didn't know what was happening at
the front door. He claims, shot once through the door,
(01:42):
killing this thirty two year old woman who was there
with her husband to clean the house. It turns up
robes she had arrived at the wrong address. Those are
the facts of the case, and this is where after that,
everybody has their own interpretation of what did happen, might
have happened, should have happened.
Speaker 3 (02:01):
Yes, so the man who owned the home, sixty two
year old Kurt Anderson. By the way, he's now facing
ten to thirty years behind bars, ten thousand dollars fine
if convicted. But yeah, he says that he was awakened
and neither both of these accounts agree that the house
cleaner and her husband were there on the porch for
(02:21):
around a minute. So he says he heard loud clanking
sound and that would presumably be the house cleaner going
through the keys, the set of keys that her cleaning
company gave her to open the door. She thought she
and her husband believed they were walking into a model home.
They didn't think anybody was inside, They didn't think anyone
lived there. They thought this was just an empty home
(02:44):
they were cleaning to be shown shortly, so they didn't
ring the doorbell, they didn't knock on the door. She
immediately was looking for the right key, and of course
she puts the key in. It's the wrong house, so
it doesn't work. So I'm sure it made some clanking noise.
But in that short period of time, he went, according
to him, to go get his gun.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
He loaded.
Speaker 3 (03:04):
He said he bought it specifically to defend his property,
and without saying anything, shouting anything, calling anyone, he fired
through that front door. He and his wife never opened
the front door, according to them, and she just called
nine one one.
Speaker 1 (03:19):
Police found the woman on the front porch. He never
even went outside to see what was going on. A
check fired through the door. So here in lies the
problem with this case. Robes it did he would you
in the middle of the No, it's not the middle
of the night, it's almost seven in the morning. But
(03:40):
let's say you don't wake up till nine whatever. You're asleep,
you hear someone trying to get in through your front door.
Do you have a reasonable fear for your life? And
if you do, then a jury could possibly down the
road say, yeah, he was justified in firing that shot.
That is going to be the central point of this case. Now,
(04:04):
is that reasonable?
Speaker 2 (04:05):
I don't think it is.
Speaker 1 (04:06):
Prosecutor doesn't either.
Speaker 3 (04:07):
I don't think it's reasonable at all. There are plenty
of other options you had. They hadn't come into the home. Now,
if they had opened the door, even if all the
same circumstances were the same, somehow they were able to
open the door and they walked in, that's scary as hell.
I could I could understand that from a legal standpoint,
but they never were.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
In your home.
Speaker 3 (04:27):
And just because someone is on your front porch, and
even if they're messing with the lock or seemingly trying
to get in, that doesn't give you the right to
use deadly force without even shouting out or asking a.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
Question, who's there? What are you doing? You know, there
could have been some kind of communication before a shot
was fired.
Speaker 1 (04:45):
Was the the it was daylight probably seven am in November, right, yes, yeah,
in Indiana, Indiana, YEP. I don't know that that's going
to be the center point, the centerpiece of his defense
is that if I am sleep and somebody, in my
estimation is trying to get into my home, why should
I not fear for my life? You talked about the
(05:06):
door opening even then, like he might have a better case,
But still, for most of us, what are you allowed
to do? What can you fear? We've seen police officers
use a justification I was scared for my life and
some of those we've seen some police officers walk right
out of court free men, Like what because they are
(05:28):
able to explain that I feared for my life? Is
he going to be able to explain that this was reasonable?
Is that enough? What should he have done? Does he
have to do anything? And we talked about this as well,
you and I bro there are exceptions made. You can't
just shoot the ups guy because you heard somebody on
your front porch, didn't look to see who it was,
and you just went pop pop pop. You can't do that.
Speaker 3 (05:50):
You can't.
Speaker 1 (05:51):
Yeah, your porch is different from the inside of your house.
Now we have expanded these castle doctrine law stand your
ground laws. Castle doctrine is you come into my house,
I can shoot you. Stand your ground is different.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
It can be anywhere.
Speaker 3 (06:08):
You can be anywhere that you are reasonably or you
should be able to consider yourself reasonably safe to be.
And you don't have to retreat. You don't have to
run from whatever perceived danger you have. You have the
right to stand your ground wherever you are and protect
and defend yourself.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
I think the key here is going to be the keys, right,
somebody's on your front porch, You don't shoot, you actually think,
and you hear someone messing with the lock, messing with
the door trying to get in, what is your reasonable fear? Then?
If you don't have family, friends, kids, nobody's come into
this house, you be trying to get into this door,
(06:47):
and if they are, they must mean me harm. Is
that reasonable?
Speaker 3 (06:51):
I don't think so, because there are still a number
of other possible explanations this one. Yes, maybe he couldn't
have come up with it because he didn't asked for
a house cleaner to come to up.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
He would never have thought that was the case.
Speaker 3 (07:04):
However, you don't know what someone's intentions are. You don't
know why they're there, and if they're there to rob
you that he didn't know if they were armed, he
didn't know if they meant him harm. And I actually
appreciate the way the prosecutor put it. He said that
he didn't have enough information to know whether or not
the action he took was reasonable, so he acted without information.
(07:28):
He acted with emotion, not with information.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
And here is where you would push back in court
on that. The law does not require me to have
all the information. It only says I can have a
reasonable fear for my life. This is my home, and
there is no chance robes at any of our homes
(07:52):
we've ever lived in that at if we're wakened in
the middle of the night or while we're sleeping, and
you are not going to think, hmm, I wont of
this person's at the right house. You're not gonna think, hmm,
I wonder what mistake this is? Good bit could have
been made.
Speaker 3 (08:04):
Let me go.
Speaker 1 (08:04):
You're gonna think somebody's here to do me harm. And
so is that enough? I don't have that answer. Legally.
Speaker 3 (08:10):
I think it's enough to react, to call out, to
say who's there, to grab your cell phone, to call
nine to one one. All of those things are more
reasonable than the choice he made to load a gun
and shoot without looking. There could have been a child
up there, There could have been anyone on that porch.
He did not know, and he fired without knowing, and
(08:32):
he knew he didn't know.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
But is that what the law requires me to gather information?
Or does it only give me the right if somebody's
here uninvited for me to shoot that person and use
deadly forced That is when I am fascinated to hear,
because I'm putting we all have to put ourselves in
the position of this homeowner. Yeah, you'd be terrified.
Speaker 2 (08:58):
Oh, yes, scared.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
My first thought, I think is not to shoot, because
I don't want to kill somebody. I mean, that's just
your nature. You might go, you might yell, you might
throw something at the door, bang, do something, call nine
one one.
Speaker 3 (09:12):
I mean, look, I could understand pointing the gun at
the door, having your cell phone on the other hand,
yelling I have a gun, I am going to shoot,
and then calling nine one one.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
Do I have it?
Speaker 3 (09:22):
Right?
Speaker 1 (09:22):
So where's that's right? He saw through the window, he
saw who was out there.
Speaker 3 (09:26):
He went and he looked around the window. He could
see from the top of his stairs through the window,
he could see that there were two people there. And
that's when he decided to shoot.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
Okay, he saw two people, does that necessarily mean he
saw exactly who it was that they seemed to be
a threat at that time of morning. We just don't
know that part this is and you're seeing some legal
debates already start on this one. This is going to
be a very very difficult case Robes because I think now,
(09:57):
and I'm asking about it here, so I've said it
several times here. Just you as a homeowner putting yourself
in the position of you are to sleep at night
and you hear someone trying to open your door that
you know no one should be trying to open it.
That is fear. I am with you though that I
wouldn't have such a fear of life that I might
(10:19):
just start shooting blindly. But does the law allow him
to do it?
Speaker 3 (10:25):
So, according to an Indiana legal expert, acting out of
fear is not enough to invoke stand your ground. When
we come back, we're going to talk about what some
legal experts have said their interpretation of this law in
Indiana is. And certainly these laws vary state by state,
and we have some very recent and some very high
(10:47):
profile examples of cases similar to this and different juries,
different prosecutors made different choices in how to pursue charge
and continuing now on Amy and TJ presents this is
(11:13):
a legal issue that we have been talking about for
years and in this latest case out of Indiana certainly
ended in a tragic, tragic death of a mother of four,
a Guatemalan immigrant who literally died in the arms of
her husband trying to open a door with a key
(11:34):
to the wrong house, to the wrong door to go
to work. She was trying to clean a home along
with her husband. She was sent there as a part
of a cleaning crew and just before seven am died
with a single bullet to the head. The homeowner said
he feared for his life. Now, look, this is up
for debate. It's a gray area. This law in thirty
(11:58):
one states, including Indiana's standard round law, gets interpreted differently
by different folks, and it's caused a lot of confusion
and problems and certainly led to some very tragic, high
profile cases.
Speaker 1 (12:10):
That has to be the trayvon Martin is the most
the biggest standout case, because I think that's when a
lot of people first heard about it and first understood wait,
wait a second, wait, wait, wait, what we couldn't believe
that that law defended a man who killed a teenager
seventeen year old kids skittles in his pocket. The law defended.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
Him because he was afraid.
Speaker 1 (12:35):
So when you talk to me about this story at Indiana,
after that experience, every standard ground case I hear, I think, well,
maybe they got a.
Speaker 3 (12:44):
Shot exactly because of what happened in the Trayvon Martin
George Zimmerman case. That flew in the face of what
a lot of folks thought the standard ground law was.
Because yes, this Indiana legal expert said, acting out of
fear is not enough to stand to invoke the ed
your ground. That flies in the face of the verdict
of George Zimmermann.
Speaker 1 (13:04):
Reasonable then they use that word allow. You had to
have a reasonable person would have a reasonable fear in
those moments. They say fear is not enough. But if
you have the reasonable expectation that you are going to
be harmed, you have the right to not retreat, even
if retreating is an option, is what the laws say.
Even if you have an exit, you have no obligation
(13:25):
to run. If you think that death or bodiling injury
is imminent to you or somebody around you, Imminent is
a big deal. I think in the issue in Indiana,
I don't know how he's going. I think in every
standard ground law, imminent is a key component. How could
he make an argument that fear of bodily injury or
(13:46):
death was imminent With somebody on the other side of
the damn.
Speaker 3 (13:48):
Door, someone trying to insert a key, or someone who
is rattling your door or trying to get it, that's
still not an unlawful entry. Once they if they had
entered his home home, he would have had a much
stronger case.
Speaker 2 (14:04):
But they didn't.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
They were on the porch and they couldn't get in.
It's reasonable to be scared. It's reasonable to call police.
It's reasonable to shout out, who's there, I have a gun.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
Leave my porch. Now. The point with the law is.
Speaker 3 (14:18):
You are expected to at least acknowledge or say leave
my property. Anyone can come on to your porch. Just
because you have private property doesn't mean that people uninvited
people can't enter your property. I mean you mentioned it,
pizza delivery, amazones, whatever, your neighbor who needs to borrow
(14:39):
a couple of whatever. Anyone can go and walk onto
your private property up until your porch and feel reasonably
secure that they can do so, they legally have a
right to you. Then can say get off my property,
get off my porch, leave now.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
That is your right.
Speaker 3 (14:58):
And once you've done that and made that acknowledgment, then
perhaps other factors can come in. But he never ever
acknowledged or said anything. And the husband who was there
on the porch said they didn't hear a peep from
inside the house. They truly did not think anyone.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
They fired it from upstairs, right, Yes, he didn't even
go downstairs.
Speaker 3 (15:18):
Didn't see what was going on, and that is what's unreasonable.
He had other options to assess what was going on.
He chose not to use them and went straight to
deadly force.
Speaker 1 (15:30):
I don't I mean, that's the argument about stands your ground.
Somebody could if somebody's running towards you with a fly
swatter set on a whoop, you ass you can't pull
out your gun and shoot him. That's not you're not
mean you can't do that. So this I don't know.
But again I'm I'm standing by and holding resident because
I every single one of these standard ground cases had
(15:51):
blown my mind before.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
And they've gone in either direction.
Speaker 1 (15:54):
Jordan Davis was in Florida, Florida, I believe as well.
He was playing loud music at a gas station and
guy said he was felt in fear and shot kid.
In that case went back and forth, a win and
a loss and a law. So I don't know.
Speaker 3 (16:09):
Yeah, who knows what the jury is going to side,
and that we know the prosecutor is pursuing charges. And
I mentioned we covered this case quite extensively and we
will follow it. The case out of Texas with the
ding Dong ditch, the eleven year old playing a game,
playing a childhood prank, ringing the doorbell and is he
using a standard ground, Yes, he is using standard ground.
Speaker 1 (16:30):
He hid in the bushes. That was that case, right
on his property. Yeah, after he did it a couple times.
The kid did it a couple of times, and he okay,
he stalk the kid almost he was lying in wait
for that. That was a different type of thing. Who
knows THO.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
To your point about Trayvon Martin and the case in
Florida with the loud music, just when you think, well,
obviously this person is going to be prosecuted and actually
punished for taking a life of someone who actually wasn't
posing a threat. You'd think that would be the case,
but you do not know in these situations because the
(17:05):
language there is a gray area. And that's why a
lot of folks are saying we should get rid of
these laws, because it emboldens folks in moments of fear
to do something that maybe they wouldn't otherwise do because
they feel as though they are protected by the law,
that they have every right to.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
Shoot first and ask questions later. And that is not
the case.
Speaker 1 (17:26):
We should have done this ahead of time. And I
would be so curious to look up because I don't
recall a single one. How many times does stand your
ground been used? Or you've heard about killings when a
criminal was there to rob the place. I don't hear
about homeowners shooting people who are there to actually rob them.
(17:48):
And I'm sure it probably, I guess, but all the
standard ground, all the cases I hear about have to
do with someone who was not actually there to do
a person harm. I would be very curious to see if,
like what use how important this law has been in
helping what saved lives?
Speaker 3 (18:08):
Yeah, you know, I think I've heard a case here
or there, but it seems as though they pale in
comparison in terms of numbers. I mean, I've heard, like,
you know, a homeowner, a woman, someone's coming in, she's
got the gun. But again I don't even know the details.
I remember hearing one once like that's to your point,
it might just not cover, it might not rise to
the level of being covered because it was affected or effectual,
(18:31):
and it was the law was being put to use
in the correct way, and so it doesn't make headlines.
Speaker 1 (18:36):
But to think, why is why this is necessary to
protect you from making a mistake? It seemed like what
it is so often, but it also seems like it
gives you more permission to make that mistake.
Speaker 3 (18:51):
What I And that's the point that people are making
that basically because folks know homeowners know or even just
people in general who pack heet who have concealed weapons
know that. Or they believe that it's their right to
defend themselves, their property, their person, their family, no matter what,
and that can be their first instinct is to shoot
(19:11):
first and to ask questions later. And that's the scary part.
And when you have a case like this, which is
so tragic and so sad I did read the part
where they didn't go outside. They called nine one one.
This is the husband and the wife who were inside
the home. But they heard her husband wailing. There was
a real tragic loss of life here from our woman
(19:33):
who was just trying to do her job. It is
incredibly sad.
Speaker 1 (19:37):
We want to leave room robes for not knowing all
the facts of what was going on in that house.
Maybe there were other factors in this, you know what
a court would consider a jurm. I consider what if
their house was broken into two weeks ago? What if
other things and other factors. You want to leave room.
I don't want to. Yes, he took a life, and
(20:00):
I don't think he wanted to. Right This could have
been just an awful mistake, a bad mistake, a bad judgment,
and a good guy had a really bad night. We
don't know. We always want to leave room for that,
but this one, obviously, Robes shouldn't have happened.
Speaker 2 (20:16):
It shouldn't have.
Speaker 3 (20:17):
And his wife, according to police reports, did say that
her husband and she was always concerned, would tell neighbors.
He went out to purchase this gun specifically to protect
his home, and he said if anyone were to ever
try to come into my home, I would shoot them immediately,
so he had it in his head that this is
what he was supposed to do, or that this is
what he was going to do. And then lo and behold,
(20:41):
this situation happened, and he made good on what he
said he would do.
Speaker 1 (20:45):
And this is where I try to leave room as
a homeowner in Georgia where these laws were in place.
Who was at home by myself in the middle of
the day when three guys tried to break into my
home in a coordinated effort, to which I went and
immediately bought guns for that house the next day, And
(21:07):
who lived most of my time in the Atlanta Era
area with guns in my house After that experience, the
next time someone attempted to do anything like that to
my home, I think my first instinct would be to
pick up my gun. Now, I don't know what my
reaction would have been, but I assure you I checked
(21:30):
up on the law after I got those guns, and
I knew what I was allowed to do. That sounds great.
Sabine was months old at that point. She was supposed
to be at home with me that day, and I
just happened to be home alone. So all those things.
If I am a juror listening to at you just
don't know. I'm not saying what he did was right
(21:50):
and justifying it anyway, But as I and I know
a lot of people are getting onto and I put
myself in that position of that fear, having gone through it,
having had weapons, and having to have the experience of
hearing something in the middle of the night in my
home in Atlanta and knowing exactly where that gun was
(22:11):
and that clip was and loaded it that night.
Speaker 2 (22:16):
I have never heard this story before. Vave.
Speaker 3 (22:19):
I knew you.
Speaker 2 (22:20):
I knew you were a gun owner, but I did
not know that story.
Speaker 1 (22:22):
That's why I was a gun owner is because of
that incident at that house. So these things are real,
and that fear is real. Yes, yes, yes, yes, And
I hate what happened and can't imagine shooting through the
door blindly. I can't imagine that. But we will see
if we get to a trial, and I wouldn't be surprised.
There are things we are going to learn that will
(22:43):
make this story probably sound.
Speaker 3 (22:45):
Different, maybe make a little bit more sense, but it
still is a tragedy in and of itself. We will,
of course follow this case and there is a lot
more to come. He's behind bars right now, awaiting a
hearing at this point, but again facing a voluntary manslaughter charge.
Thank you so much for listening to us everyone. I'm
Amy Robach alongside t. J.
Speaker 2 (23:05):
Holmes. We always appreciate you
Hey, they're folks. Welcome to Amy and TJ Presents. And
today a man in Indiana shot and killed a woman
who had shown up to his house just to clean
the house. He has yes been charged, but he has
a defense, folks, stand your ground. And with that, welcome
(00:26):
to this episode of Amy and TJ Presents. DJ Holmes
here alongside Amy roboch Robes. This is going to be
another case that we have these stand your ground laws
getting national attention.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Yes.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
And the concern is that sometimes these laws a lot
of folks believe make homeowners especially feel like they have
the right to defend their property, their family with deadly force,
no matter what, and that just isn't the case.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
And some try to interpret the law just as what
you said, I can defend my home no matter what,
with deadly force. And this is a case Robes that
I think we're going to have some tricky, tricky legal questions.
This story comes to us out of Indiana, outside of Indianapolis,
a town is called, of all things, White's Town. Do
(01:18):
I have that right?
Speaker 2 (01:18):
Yeah, you do. It's called Whitewn.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Whitestown, a suburb of Indianapolis. But this is on November fifth,
that a woman showed up to a home with her
husband cleaning crew. They're trying to open the door to
get into this home. Just before seven am. Shot rings out.
Homeowner inside awakened, startled, didn't know what was happening at
the front door. He claims, shot once through the door,
(01:42):
killing this thirty two year old woman who was there
with her husband to clean the house. It turns up
robes she had arrived at the wrong address. Those are
the facts of the case, and this is where after that,
everybody has their own interpretation of what did happen, might
have happened, should have happened.
Speaker 3 (02:01):
Yes, so the man who owned the home, sixty two
year old Kurt Anderson. By the way, he's now facing
ten to thirty years behind bars, ten thousand dollars fine
if convicted. But yeah, he says that he was awakened
and neither both of these accounts agree that the house
cleaner and her husband were there on the porch for
(02:21):
around a minute. So he says he heard loud clanking
sound and that would presumably be the house cleaner going
through the keys, the set of keys that her cleaning
company gave her to open the door. She thought she
and her husband believed they were walking into a model home.
They didn't think anybody was inside, They didn't think anyone
lived there. They thought this was just an empty home
(02:44):
they were cleaning to be shown shortly, so they didn't
ring the doorbell, they didn't knock on the door. She
immediately was looking for the right key, and of course
she puts the key in. It's the wrong house, so
it doesn't work. So I'm sure it made some clanking noise.
But in that short period of time, he went, according
to him, to go get his gun.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
He loaded.
Speaker 3 (03:04):
He said he bought it specifically to defend his property,
and without saying anything, shouting anything, calling anyone, he fired
through that front door. He and his wife never opened
the front door, according to them, and she just called
nine one one.
Speaker 1 (03:19):
Police found the woman on the front porch. He never
even went outside to see what was going on. A
check fired through the door. So here in lies the
problem with this case. Robes it did he would you
in the middle of the No, it's not the middle
of the night, it's almost seven in the morning. But
(03:40):
let's say you don't wake up till nine whatever. You're asleep,
you hear someone trying to get in through your front door.
Do you have a reasonable fear for your life? And
if you do, then a jury could possibly down the
road say, yeah, he was justified in firing that shot.
That is going to be the central point of this case. Now,
(04:04):
is that reasonable?
Speaker 2 (04:05):
I don't think it is.
Speaker 1 (04:06):
Prosecutor doesn't either.
Speaker 3 (04:07):
I don't think it's reasonable at all. There are plenty
of other options you had. They hadn't come into the home. Now,
if they had opened the door, even if all the
same circumstances were the same, somehow they were able to
open the door and they walked in, that's scary as hell.
I could I could understand that from a legal standpoint,
but they never were.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
In your home.
Speaker 3 (04:27):
And just because someone is on your front porch, and
even if they're messing with the lock or seemingly trying
to get in, that doesn't give you the right to
use deadly force without even shouting out or asking a.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
Question, who's there? What are you doing? You know, there
could have been some kind of communication before a shot
was fired.
Speaker 1 (04:45):
Was the the it was daylight probably seven am in November, right, yes, yeah,
in Indiana, Indiana, YEP. I don't know that that's going
to be the center point, the centerpiece of his defense
is that if I am sleep and somebody, in my
estimation is trying to get into my home, why should
I not fear for my life? You talked about the
(05:06):
door opening even then, like he might have a better case,
But still, for most of us, what are you allowed
to do? What can you fear? We've seen police officers
use a justification I was scared for my life and
some of those we've seen some police officers walk right
out of court free men, Like what because they are
(05:28):
able to explain that I feared for my life? Is
he going to be able to explain that this was reasonable?
Is that enough? What should he have done? Does he
have to do anything? And we talked about this as well,
you and I bro there are exceptions made. You can't
just shoot the ups guy because you heard somebody on
your front porch, didn't look to see who it was,
and you just went pop pop pop. You can't do that.
Speaker 3 (05:50):
You can't.
Speaker 1 (05:51):
Yeah, your porch is different from the inside of your house.
Now we have expanded these castle doctrine law stand your
ground laws. Castle doctrine is you come into my house,
I can shoot you. Stand your ground is different.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
It can be anywhere.
Speaker 3 (06:08):
You can be anywhere that you are reasonably or you
should be able to consider yourself reasonably safe to be.
And you don't have to retreat. You don't have to
run from whatever perceived danger you have. You have the
right to stand your ground wherever you are and protect
and defend yourself.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
I think the key here is going to be the keys, right,
somebody's on your front porch, You don't shoot, you actually think,
and you hear someone messing with the lock, messing with
the door trying to get in, what is your reasonable fear? Then?
If you don't have family, friends, kids, nobody's come into
this house, you be trying to get into this door,
(06:47):
and if they are, they must mean me harm. Is
that reasonable?
Speaker 3 (06:51):
I don't think so, because there are still a number
of other possible explanations this one. Yes, maybe he couldn't
have come up with it because he didn't asked for
a house cleaner to come to up.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
He would never have thought that was the case.
Speaker 3 (07:04):
However, you don't know what someone's intentions are. You don't
know why they're there, and if they're there to rob
you that he didn't know if they were armed, he
didn't know if they meant him harm. And I actually
appreciate the way the prosecutor put it. He said that
he didn't have enough information to know whether or not
the action he took was reasonable, so he acted without information.
(07:28):
He acted with emotion, not with information.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
And here is where you would push back in court
on that. The law does not require me to have
all the information. It only says I can have a
reasonable fear for my life. This is my home, and
there is no chance robes at any of our homes
(07:52):
we've ever lived in that at if we're wakened in
the middle of the night or while we're sleeping, and
you are not going to think, hmm, I wont of
this person's at the right house. You're not gonna think, hmm,
I wonder what mistake this is? Good bit could have
been made.
Speaker 3 (08:04):
Let me go.
Speaker 1 (08:04):
You're gonna think somebody's here to do me harm. And
so is that enough? I don't have that answer. Legally.
Speaker 3 (08:10):
I think it's enough to react, to call out, to
say who's there, to grab your cell phone, to call
nine to one one. All of those things are more
reasonable than the choice he made to load a gun
and shoot without looking. There could have been a child
up there, There could have been anyone on that porch.
He did not know, and he fired without knowing, and
(08:32):
he knew he didn't know.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
But is that what the law requires me to gather information?
Or does it only give me the right if somebody's
here uninvited for me to shoot that person and use
deadly forced That is when I am fascinated to hear,
because I'm putting we all have to put ourselves in
the position of this homeowner. Yeah, you'd be terrified.
Speaker 2 (08:58):
Oh, yes, scared.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
My first thought, I think is not to shoot, because
I don't want to kill somebody. I mean, that's just
your nature. You might go, you might yell, you might
throw something at the door, bang, do something, call nine
one one.
Speaker 3 (09:12):
I mean, look, I could understand pointing the gun at
the door, having your cell phone on the other hand,
yelling I have a gun, I am going to shoot,
and then calling nine one one.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
Do I have it?
Speaker 3 (09:22):
Right?
Speaker 1 (09:22):
So where's that's right? He saw through the window, he
saw who was out there.
Speaker 3 (09:26):
He went and he looked around the window. He could
see from the top of his stairs through the window,
he could see that there were two people there. And
that's when he decided to shoot.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
Okay, he saw two people, does that necessarily mean he
saw exactly who it was that they seemed to be
a threat at that time of morning. We just don't
know that part this is and you're seeing some legal
debates already start on this one. This is going to
be a very very difficult case Robes because I think now,
(09:57):
and I'm asking about it here, so I've said it
several times here. Just you as a homeowner putting yourself
in the position of you are to sleep at night
and you hear someone trying to open your door that
you know no one should be trying to open it.
That is fear. I am with you though that I
wouldn't have such a fear of life that I might
(10:19):
just start shooting blindly. But does the law allow him
to do it?
Speaker 3 (10:25):
So, according to an Indiana legal expert, acting out of
fear is not enough to invoke stand your ground. When
we come back, we're going to talk about what some
legal experts have said their interpretation of this law in
Indiana is. And certainly these laws vary state by state,
and we have some very recent and some very high
(10:47):
profile examples of cases similar to this and different juries,
different prosecutors made different choices in how to pursue charge
and continuing now on Amy and TJ presents this is
(11:13):
a legal issue that we have been talking about for
years and in this latest case out of Indiana certainly
ended in a tragic, tragic death of a mother of four,
a Guatemalan immigrant who literally died in the arms of
her husband trying to open a door with a key
(11:34):
to the wrong house, to the wrong door to go
to work. She was trying to clean a home along
with her husband. She was sent there as a part
of a cleaning crew and just before seven am died
with a single bullet to the head. The homeowner said
he feared for his life. Now, look, this is up
for debate. It's a gray area. This law in thirty
(11:58):
one states, including Indiana's standard round law, gets interpreted differently
by different folks, and it's caused a lot of confusion
and problems and certainly led to some very tragic, high
profile cases.
Speaker 1 (12:10):
That has to be the trayvon Martin is the most
the biggest standout case, because I think that's when a
lot of people first heard about it and first understood wait,
wait a second, wait, wait, wait, what we couldn't believe
that that law defended a man who killed a teenager
seventeen year old kids skittles in his pocket. The law defended.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
Him because he was afraid.
Speaker 1 (12:35):
So when you talk to me about this story at Indiana,
after that experience, every standard ground case I hear, I think, well,
maybe they got a.
Speaker 3 (12:44):
Shot exactly because of what happened in the Trayvon Martin
George Zimmerman case. That flew in the face of what
a lot of folks thought the standard ground law was.
Because yes, this Indiana legal expert said, acting out of
fear is not enough to stand to invoke the ed
your ground. That flies in the face of the verdict
of George Zimmermann.
Speaker 1 (13:04):
Reasonable then they use that word allow. You had to
have a reasonable person would have a reasonable fear in
those moments. They say fear is not enough. But if
you have the reasonable expectation that you are going to
be harmed, you have the right to not retreat, even
if retreating is an option, is what the laws say.
Even if you have an exit, you have no obligation
(13:25):
to run. If you think that death or bodiling injury
is imminent to you or somebody around you, Imminent is
a big deal. I think in the issue in Indiana,
I don't know how he's going. I think in every
standard ground law, imminent is a key component. How could
he make an argument that fear of bodily injury or
(13:46):
death was imminent With somebody on the other side of
the damn.
Speaker 3 (13:48):
Door, someone trying to insert a key, or someone who
is rattling your door or trying to get it, that's
still not an unlawful entry. Once they if they had
entered his home home, he would have had a much
stronger case.
Speaker 2 (14:04):
But they didn't.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
They were on the porch and they couldn't get in.
It's reasonable to be scared. It's reasonable to call police.
It's reasonable to shout out, who's there, I have a gun.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
Leave my porch. Now. The point with the law is.
Speaker 3 (14:18):
You are expected to at least acknowledge or say leave
my property. Anyone can come on to your porch. Just
because you have private property doesn't mean that people uninvited
people can't enter your property. I mean you mentioned it,
pizza delivery, amazones, whatever, your neighbor who needs to borrow
(14:39):
a couple of whatever. Anyone can go and walk onto
your private property up until your porch and feel reasonably
secure that they can do so, they legally have a
right to you. Then can say get off my property,
get off my porch, leave now.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
That is your right.
Speaker 3 (14:58):
And once you've done that and made that acknowledgment, then
perhaps other factors can come in. But he never ever
acknowledged or said anything. And the husband who was there
on the porch said they didn't hear a peep from
inside the house. They truly did not think anyone.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
They fired it from upstairs, right, Yes, he didn't even
go downstairs.
Speaker 3 (15:18):
Didn't see what was going on, and that is what's unreasonable.
He had other options to assess what was going on.
He chose not to use them and went straight to
deadly force.
Speaker 1 (15:30):
I don't I mean, that's the argument about stands your ground.
Somebody could if somebody's running towards you with a fly
swatter set on a whoop, you ass you can't pull
out your gun and shoot him. That's not you're not
mean you can't do that. So this I don't know.
But again I'm I'm standing by and holding resident because
I every single one of these standard ground cases had
(15:51):
blown my mind before.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
And they've gone in either direction.
Speaker 1 (15:54):
Jordan Davis was in Florida, Florida, I believe as well.
He was playing loud music at a gas station and
guy said he was felt in fear and shot kid.
In that case went back and forth, a win and
a loss and a law. So I don't know.
Speaker 3 (16:09):
Yeah, who knows what the jury is going to side,
and that we know the prosecutor is pursuing charges. And
I mentioned we covered this case quite extensively and we
will follow it. The case out of Texas with the
ding Dong ditch, the eleven year old playing a game,
playing a childhood prank, ringing the doorbell and is he
using a standard ground, Yes, he is using standard ground.
Speaker 1 (16:30):
He hid in the bushes. That was that case, right
on his property. Yeah, after he did it a couple times.
The kid did it a couple of times, and he okay,
he stalk the kid almost he was lying in wait
for that. That was a different type of thing. Who
knows THO.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
To your point about Trayvon Martin and the case in
Florida with the loud music, just when you think, well,
obviously this person is going to be prosecuted and actually
punished for taking a life of someone who actually wasn't
posing a threat. You'd think that would be the case,
but you do not know in these situations because the
(17:05):
language there is a gray area. And that's why a
lot of folks are saying we should get rid of
these laws, because it emboldens folks in moments of fear
to do something that maybe they wouldn't otherwise do because
they feel as though they are protected by the law,
that they have every right to.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
Shoot first and ask questions later. And that is not
the case.
Speaker 1 (17:26):
We should have done this ahead of time. And I
would be so curious to look up because I don't
recall a single one. How many times does stand your
ground been used? Or you've heard about killings when a
criminal was there to rob the place. I don't hear
about homeowners shooting people who are there to actually rob them.
(17:48):
And I'm sure it probably, I guess, but all the
standard ground, all the cases I hear about have to
do with someone who was not actually there to do
a person harm. I would be very curious to see if,
like what use how important this law has been in
helping what saved lives?
Speaker 3 (18:08):
Yeah, you know, I think I've heard a case here
or there, but it seems as though they pale in
comparison in terms of numbers. I mean, I've heard, like,
you know, a homeowner, a woman, someone's coming in, she's
got the gun. But again I don't even know the details.
I remember hearing one once like that's to your point,
it might just not cover, it might not rise to
the level of being covered because it was affected or effectual,
(18:31):
and it was the law was being put to use
in the correct way, and so it doesn't make headlines.
Speaker 1 (18:36):
But to think, why is why this is necessary to
protect you from making a mistake? It seemed like what
it is so often, but it also seems like it
gives you more permission to make that mistake.
Speaker 3 (18:51):
What I And that's the point that people are making
that basically because folks know homeowners know or even just
people in general who pack heet who have concealed weapons
know that. Or they believe that it's their right to
defend themselves, their property, their person, their family, no matter what,
and that can be their first instinct is to shoot
(19:11):
first and to ask questions later. And that's the scary part.
And when you have a case like this, which is
so tragic and so sad I did read the part
where they didn't go outside. They called nine one one.
This is the husband and the wife who were inside
the home. But they heard her husband wailing. There was
a real tragic loss of life here from our woman
(19:33):
who was just trying to do her job. It is
incredibly sad.
Speaker 1 (19:37):
We want to leave room robes for not knowing all
the facts of what was going on in that house.
Maybe there were other factors in this, you know what
a court would consider a jurm. I consider what if
their house was broken into two weeks ago? What if
other things and other factors. You want to leave room.
I don't want to. Yes, he took a life, and
(20:00):
I don't think he wanted to. Right This could have
been just an awful mistake, a bad mistake, a bad judgment,
and a good guy had a really bad night. We
don't know. We always want to leave room for that,
but this one, obviously, Robes shouldn't have happened.
Speaker 2 (20:16):
It shouldn't have.
Speaker 3 (20:17):
And his wife, according to police reports, did say that
her husband and she was always concerned, would tell neighbors.
He went out to purchase this gun specifically to protect
his home, and he said if anyone were to ever
try to come into my home, I would shoot them immediately,
so he had it in his head that this is
what he was supposed to do, or that this is
what he was going to do. And then lo and behold,
(20:41):
this situation happened, and he made good on what he
said he would do.
Speaker 1 (20:45):
And this is where I try to leave room as
a homeowner in Georgia where these laws were in place.
Who was at home by myself in the middle of
the day when three guys tried to break into my
home in a coordinated effort, to which I went and
immediately bought guns for that house the next day, And
(21:07):
who lived most of my time in the Atlanta Era
area with guns in my house After that experience, the
next time someone attempted to do anything like that to
my home, I think my first instinct would be to
pick up my gun. Now, I don't know what my
reaction would have been, but I assure you I checked
(21:30):
up on the law after I got those guns, and
I knew what I was allowed to do. That sounds great.
Sabine was months old at that point. She was supposed
to be at home with me that day, and I
just happened to be home alone. So all those things.
If I am a juror listening to at you just
don't know. I'm not saying what he did was right
(21:50):
and justifying it anyway, But as I and I know
a lot of people are getting onto and I put
myself in that position of that fear, having gone through it,
having had weapons, and having to have the experience of
hearing something in the middle of the night in my
home in Atlanta and knowing exactly where that gun was
(22:11):
and that clip was and loaded it that night.
Speaker 2 (22:16):
I have never heard this story before. Vave.
Speaker 3 (22:19):
I knew you.
Speaker 2 (22:20):
I knew you were a gun owner, but I did
not know that story.
Speaker 1 (22:22):
That's why I was a gun owner is because of
that incident at that house. So these things are real,
and that fear is real. Yes, yes, yes, yes, And
I hate what happened and can't imagine shooting through the
door blindly. I can't imagine that. But we will see
if we get to a trial, and I wouldn't be surprised.
There are things we are going to learn that will
(22:43):
make this story probably sound.
Speaker 3 (22:45):
Different, maybe make a little bit more sense, but it
still is a tragedy in and of itself. We will,
of course follow this case and there is a lot
more to come. He's behind bars right now, awaiting a
hearing at this point, but again facing a voluntary manslaughter charge.
Thank you so much for listening to us everyone. I'm
Amy Robach alongside t. J.
Speaker 2 (23:05):
Holmes. We always appreciate you
Hosts And Creators
Amy Robach
T.J. Holmes
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Ruthie's Table 4
For more than 30 years The River Cafe in London, has been the home-from-home of artists, architects, designers, actors, collectors, writers, activists, and politicians. Michael Caine, Glenn Close, JJ Abrams, Steve McQueen, Victoria and David Beckham, and Lily Allen, are just some of the people who love to call The River Cafe home. On River Cafe Table 4, Rogers sits down with her customers—who have become friends—to talk about food memories. Table 4 explores how food impacts every aspect of our lives. “Foods is politics, food is cultural, food is how you express love, food is about your heritage, it defines who you and who you want to be,” says Rogers. Each week, Rogers invites her guest to reminisce about family suppers and first dates, what they cook, how they eat when performing, the restaurants they choose, and what food they seek when they need comfort. And to punctuate each episode of Table 4, guests such as Ralph Fiennes, Emily Blunt, and Alfonso Cuarón, read their favourite recipe from one of the best-selling River Cafe cookbooks. Table 4 itself, is situated near The River Cafe’s open kitchen, close to the bright pink wood-fired oven and next to the glossy yellow pass, where Ruthie oversees the restaurant. You are invited to take a seat at this intimate table and join the conversation. For more information, recipes, and ingredients, go to https://shoptherivercafe.co.uk/ Web: https://rivercafe.co.uk/ Instagram: www.instagram.com/therivercafelondon/ Facebook: https://en-gb.facebook.com/therivercafelondon/ For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iheartradio app, apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com